Dr Bruce Rapley Slams Australian Medical Association as Totally Unqualified Wind Industry Propagandists

computer stethescope doctor

The AMA: no longer medicos, they’ve become
paragons of wind power propaganda.

 ****

Once upon a time, doctors (and we mean legally qualified medical practitioners – not media manipulators with journalism degrees or PhDs in sociology) were protective – even virulently so – of public health. And rightly so.

But that was then; this is now.

In less than 5 years, a small but noisy percentage of Australian medicos have joined the wind-worshipper cult. And, as a consequence, have not only torched their fading copies of the Hippocratic oath, they’ve become rabid fundamentalist preachers – quick to attack anybody with the temerity to so much as investigate the long-known and obvious impacts of incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound on neighbours. Obvious impacts, such as long-term sleep deprivation – for over 60 years recognised by the World Health Organisation as in and of itself an adverse health effect:

SA Farmers Paid $1 Million to Host 19 Turbines Tell Senate they “Would Never Do it Again” due to “Unbearable” Sleep-Destroying Noise

Australian Doctors’ so-called ‘peak body’, the Australian Medical Association (AMA) has become little more than a propaganda wing for the likes of near-bankrupt Infigen (aka Babcock & Brown) and superannuation savings shredders – Pacific Hydro.

The AMA has published all sorts of drivel – drafted up by the wind industry and its parasites – in a deliberate effort to cover up the mounting evidence of real and substantial harm to Australian citizens. So much for that old chestnut about requiring doctors to “first do no harm”…

Willfully turning a blind eye to a serious public health issue is one thing, but actively assisting the perpetrators is quite another. To say that the AMA has become a National disgrace is to flatter them:

Australian Medical Association: A National Disgrace

Doctors, however, are not new to the paid-up-propaganda game.

Cast your mind back to the time when tobacco companies used glowing endorsements from white-coated medicos – who all looked like Cary Grant – about the “smoothness” on the throat of their particular brand; and otherwise used the supremacy of doctors’ unquestioned authority to sanction the ‘safety’ of their product.

However, in Germany – where its countryside has been carpeted with these things and there are literally thousands of victims – German doctors have sought to shut down any further expansion – in an effort to protect their patients (or, more to the point, themselves from malpractice suits):

German Medicos Demand Moratorium on New Wind Farms

Notwithstanding the compassion, commonsense – and dare we say it ‘ethics’ – of their German equivalent, the AMA continues on its path of malign acquiescence, towards those with the misfortune of being stuck with incessant noise and vibration generated by 3MW monsters – permitted to operate around the clock.

But, fortunately, not without challenge from highly (and relevantly) qualified people – like New Zealander, Dr Bruce Rapley.

Bruce gave the ludicrous wind farm ‘nocebo’ theory the belting it properly deserved, when he appeared before the Senate Inquiry:

Dr Bruce Rapley tells Senate: Wind Farm Nocebo Story “Nefarious Pseudoscience” & an “Insult to Intelligence”

Bruce covered that wind industry nonsense – and a whole lot more – in a set of cracking submissions – which the wind industry and its parasites did its level best to suppress (his work was only included on the Parliamentary website at the very last minute, after repeated badgering from Bruce and the Committee’s chairman, John Madigan and others). Bruce’s submissions – which we thoroughly commend – are available here: (sub409_Atkinson & Rapley Consulting; sub409a_Appendix and sub409ss_Supplementary submission).

To call Bruce’s work ‘exhaustive’ and ‘substantial’ is to downplay its significance.

Among the numerous topics covered, Bruce deals with the complete (and deliberate) irrelevance of the so-called ‘noise standards’ – drawn up by the wind industry and employed to permit wind power outfits to ride roughshod over the common law rights of citizens to sleep, live in and otherwise enjoy their very own homes.

On that score, here’s a little summary (from page 13) of what Bruce had to say in his main submission, titled: ‘Systemic failure of a Noise Standard: A case study of NZ6808:2010’:

  • NZS6808:2010 is a standard that ignores much of the empirical evidence relating to adverse health effects experienced by people who live in close proximity to industrial wind turbine installations.
  • The standard was created by a committee, the majority of whom had current or past associations with the wind industry: the potential for commercial conflicts of interest is obvious.
  • The standard favours industry at the expense of public health and denies any scientific evidence that would jeopardise this stance.
  • The standard promotes the scientifically incorrect view that “what you cannot hear (perceive audibly) cannot harm you”.
  • The standard relies on an out-dated acoustic metric, the A-Weighting, that specifically under-reports frequencies below 1,000 Hz.
  • The standard is in urgent need of revision. It must take into account the wealth of empirical and medical evidence of adverse health effects. It must also take notice of the latest scientific evidence that reveals the mechanism of action of lowfrequency and infrasound on the human receiver.
  • Such a new standard must be predicated on the preservation of public health and amenity, with particular reference to ensuring people can get adequate sleep, rather than supporting the proliferation of an industrial technology that clearly can and does have an adverse effect on human health.
  • The standard should take into account how it will protect vulnerable groups within the population including:
    • people with a history of motion sickness, migraines and inner ear pathology or industrial deafness;
    • the elderly;
    • young children;
    • invalids;
    • people suffering from Autistic Spectrum Disorders;
    • those possessing a congenitally-small or obstructed helicotrema as a result of infection and those with more sensitive hearing.
bruce rapley

Dr Bruce Rapley (centre) gives the AMA a long overdue
drubbing for its consistently malign acquiescence.

****

Not content with a pointed and well-justified attack on the wind industry’s derisory noise ‘standards’, Bruce concentrated his well-credentialed fire-power on the institutional corruption that infects the AMA.

The fight gets dirty – bring in the big guns
Senate Select Committee: Wind Turbines
Dr Bruce Rapley
Submission 409 (p66-70)
27 February 2015

This debate has become dirty, with the wind industry wheeling in pseudo experts to flood the media with their propaganda. The landmark work of Steven Cooper at Cape Bridgewater has shown strong evidence of a cause and effect relationship between the output power of industrial turbine emissions and reported sensation. For his efforts he has been pilloried in the public press/media. That this is likely to result in legal action underlines the seriousness of this campaign by the wind industry which appears to be totally focussed on destroying any person or group that threatens their commercial imperatives. Enter the Australian Medical Association.

That the AMA (Australian Medical Association) has publicly come out in support of the industrial wind turbine developers is yet one more example of how corrupt the system has become. In stating:

Wind turbine technology is considered a comparatively inexpensive and effective means of energy production.

they have overstepped the authority of their profession and should be held responsible for it.

When the AMA then states:

Wind turbines generate sound, including infrasound, which is very low frequency noise that is generally inaudible to the human ear.

they are again stepping outside of their area of expertise and knowledge base. To continue, the AMA say that:

Infrasound is ubiquitous in the environment, emanating from natural sources (e.g. wind, rivers) and from artificial sources including road traffic, ventilation systems, aircraft and other machinery.

This suggests that the AMA consider that low-frequency emissions from wind turbines are nothing new in the environment and no different to existing sources. The contention of the AMA that such low-frequency and infrasound has no effect on public and personal health is simply a ludicrous notion, demonstrating how little the medical profession understands acoustics or, it is suggested, is willing to ignore some facts for some nefarious, political reasons. Why did the AMA step outside its area of expertise to support the wind industry to the detriment of members of the general public? The very public that the AMA is ethically bound to protect.

There are numerous scientific references in the literature that clearly state that wind turbine emissions are a unique addition to the natural soundscape. As medical students are required to be able to read to enter medical school, the only conclusion is that once qualified, they choose not to read scientific journals, unless they present a viewpoint consistent with their own or current medical dogma. It is hard to understand how a group of highly qualified medical professionals could act in such an unprofessional way. In their statement regarding wind energy they claim:

All modern wind turbines in Australia are designed to be upwind, with the blade in front of the tower. These upwind turbines generate much lower levels of infrasound and low frequency sound.

That downwind turbines have been known for more than 30 years to be a source of problematic noise emissions does not address the actual issue of the emissions from upwind turbines and whether or not these levels could be harmful to residents living in proximity. By making the above statement, the AMA appears to be admitting that wind turbines generate low-frequency and infrasound. The AMA displays not only their ignorance but also their bias when they opine:

Infrasound levels in the vicinity of wind farms have been measured and compared to a number of urban and rural environments away from wind farms. The results of these measurements have shown that in rural residences both near to and far away from wind turbines, both indoor and outdoor infrasound levels are well below the perception threshold, and no greater than that experienced in other rural and urban environments.

The only way that such a nonsensical conclusion could be reached is by actively cherrypicking the data and ignoring anything that contradicts their chosen position. This is not the way that science works. Sir Karl Popper pointed out that all we have in science is a series of models to explain observations. While evidence that supports the model can make us think that the model is more likely to be correct, it takes only one example to the contrary to destroy a long-cherished ‘belief’.

That a professional organisation, the AMA, has come out with public policy statements that are well beyond their area of expertise and knowledge base is indicative of a system in crisis. As one of the many scientists who wrote to the AMA to question their position, this Author was simply one more voice that was ignored by the association while they continued to support an industry that is becoming more questionable every day. That they cannot even respond to serious, scientific criticism is reason enough to question their basic tenets and professional ethics. This Author’s letter to the AMA can be found in the Appendices.

The philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer, once said that all truth passes through three stages:

  • First, it is ridiculed.
  • Second, it is violently opposed.
  • Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Clearly the industrial wind turbine debate has only reached stage two as at the time of writing.

That there is a sizeable conspiracy involving the wind industry is now becoming abundantly clear as the only explanation for what is unfolding. The recent actions of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) to remove the charity status of the Waubra Foundation is yet one more piece of evidence indicative of the depth of the corruption. (This Author’s letter to the ACNC can be found in the appendix.)

In the final analysis, science is not a numbers game. It is a not a democracy where the most popular vote wins. Rather science prides itself on its basis in logical, rational thought processes and protocols, and use of empirical observations. That the scientific method is so misunderstood, so misapplied and so easily hijacked for commercial gain, is an indictment of human society.

A growing number of scientists, engineers and acousticians around the world are slowly coming together to fight the corrupt practice of the wind industry and their associated henchmen. How long will it take before common sense prevails? How many more people must suffer because of the fiscal bottom line of an industry unconcerned with human health? It is harrowing to realise that Adolf Hitler was correct when he asserted:

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it.

More evidence of Hitler’s beliefs is evident in the wind industry’s modus operandi as they continue to attack anyone who would question their viewpoint:

Strength lies not in defence but in attack.

What we are left with is the quotation from the Irish statesman, author, orator, political theorist and philosopher: Edmund Burke (1729-1797):

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

The Australian Senate now has an awesome task to perform: to consider the public health issues associated with the industrial wind turbine industry, to agree on and suggest appropriate technical requirements to regulate it appropriately to minimise human suffering. No longer can the science be ignored, or the empirical evidence denied until ‘sufficient’ proof is obtained. As Rob Rand, an acoustician in the United States stated in response to the recent Australian Media Watch debacle:

It would be unethical of me as a member of Institute of Noise Control Engineering to wait for the years required for such careful medical research work to be completed. I have sufficient correlation already from the neighbours’ reports and affidavits and the measurements done thus far to inform others for designing properly to be good acoustic neighbours.

In no other industry would the burden of proof be placed on the victim, rather it is the responsibility of industry to guarantee safe, fit-for-purpose products. The Senate now has the job of finding a way through this crisis to minimise the adverse public health outcomes before many more people are harmed by this folly of obtaining ‘free energy’ from wind. To fail to act at this time is to condemn many more people to a life of illness and virtual torture, not to mention the many who have been forced out of their homes.

Politicians have a duty of care, and now that they have been so advised, any future decisions they make must be seen against the evidence of palpable harm from industrial wind turbine installations of which they have now been made aware. Therefore, any subsequent harm as a result of their decisions will be undertaken in the full knowledge of the consequences. Politicians must take responsibility for their actions in the execution of their public duty.
Atkinson & Rapley Consulting

For more of Bruce’s pointed attack on our rotten little AMA, see his letter to the AMA from March last year, which starts at page 171 of the Appendix to his main submission – available here: Appendices.

***

 history-repeats tobacco and wind

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.

Comments

  1. I have objected before to the insult “windweasel” hurled at a beneficial, bold, and beautiful member of the mustelid family.
    But aside from that, the AMA in this article should be excluded from consideration until they produce a group of experimenters as honest as J.B.S. Haldane, who did not hesitate to ingest sub-lethal dose of poisonous chemicals for the sake of science.
    His father ascertained in like manner how much carbon monoxide it took to lose consciousness.

    Anyway, such a group would be qualified to give a medical opinion on the effects of infrasound if they spent, perhaps a month, within 300 metres of a biggish wind turbine.

    There is no reason to suppose that they know any more than the ignorant populace about whether wind turbines actually affect the rate at which humans are causing the atmosphere to fail to radiate out all of the energy that radiates in, from the Sun.

  2. Jackie Rovenksy says:

    Just a note, that industry employee KJ has tweeted a couple of tweets re STT, one was to query whether STT is allowed to used the AMA logo, tweeting the above pictures. Perhaps he should make sure his comments are ‘based on facts’ as the AMA logo on their website is different to the one on STT.

  3. Jackie Rovenksy says:

    The AMA responded to a question on notice from the Senate Committee to provide the names of those who sanctioned the Association’s Position Statement, by saying everyone concerned was either no longer working for the AMA, or had been replaced in May 2014, (the Position Statement was approved in March 2014), therefore they did not see the need to provide their names.

    The Position Statement is still on their website, so while none of those who prepared and sanctioned it no longer make such decision those currently in a position to review and rescind it are not interested in doing so.

    Therefore, it makes no difference who first sanctioned it those who replaced them are just as culpable, by virtue of inaction to withdraw it.

    Any Australian qualified and/or approved Doctor who does not examine their patients and provide them with appropriate treatment for their ailments and do no report possible external industrial dangers to their patients health are failing in their duty of care to their patients well being.

    As such they are acting in a manner which could be harming their patients, even though they have been made aware of possible dangers.

    It is up to Doctors no matter their level of experience to ensure their patients receive a level of treatment commensurate with their reported conditions.

    If a GP cannot find a cause for a patients reported illness, it is up to them to recommend and refer the patient to those who have a specialisation in possible causes of their patients illness.

    It is not up to them to determine their patients are ill due to some cause unless the patient has been examined by appropriate medical experts and a conclusive cause has been found.
    While the AMA position statement says “Individuals who experience heightened anxiety or diminished health and well-being in the context of local wind farms should seek medical advice.”

    The wording of the statement ensures anyone who does may NOT receive advice or treatment they need especially IF THE DOCTOR they see has the same misguided, biased, blind and utterly inaccurate assessment of their duty of care as the Association does.

    One has to wonder if this Doctors Association (Union) has an ulterior motive other than the health care of Australians.
    Thank goodness there are those who see and accept the difference between an ideological or political belief and the Duty of Care their profession is meant to exemplify, and the Respect their profession has been given as a result of this.

    Obviously the AMA is of the opinion that respect is meaningless, and not needed anymore and are happy to bow to the wishes of an industry rather than remain independent and above reproach.

  4. Chapman is one of the windweasel grubs and they will be all brought to justice before this wind farm fiasco is all over. I hope they all get their just deserts for all the torture they have caused citizens that have had to put up with the infrasound and low-frequency noise from these rotten fans.

  5. The most virulent of the pro-wind propagandists is of course Simon Chapman. He noticed the wind issue very late…I think his first foray was an article on Crikey in 2011- one of the funniest things I ever saw on Crikey- because he knew zero about wind turbines.

    At one point he banged on about the Dutch having had windmills for centuries without ill effects!

    I used to write for Crikey for a while, until their pro-wind zealotry turned me instead into a daily commenter. They’d never publish a piece from me now…

    Chapman’s career was based on attacking tobacco…I’m sure no one minded his assaults on them- but anti-smoking is now institutionalised and Chapman was ripe for a new cause.

    Appropriately, this was wind.

    With the crucial difference that he was now on the side of the corporations, not the victims.

    Ridicule is a key Chapman tool- he’s called anti-wind protesters “wingnuts” etc. But his chief target was Dr Sarah Laurie.

    Now we see Professor Wind forced, finally, to issue an abject apology to Dr. Laurie. This is it:

    CORRECTION & APOLOGY FROM PROFESSOR SIMON CHAPMAN TO SARAH LAURIE

    I am a Professor of Public Health at the University of Sydney.
    On 20 March 2014, I retweeted the following tweet concerning Sarah Laurie:

    NOT DROWNING, RANTING: Deregistered “Dr” Sarah Laurie doesn’t like the medicine dished up by @ama_media Waubrafoundation.org.au/resources/open”

    My tweet implied that Ms Laurie had given cause to the Medical Board of Australia to deregister her as a medical practitioner, on account of unprofessional conduct: that she is not entitled to use the title “Dr”; and that she does so in contravention of the laws that govern the conduct of medical practitioners.

    These allegations were implied without foundation and are entirely false.

    Ms Laurie is not deregistered and has never been sanctioned by the Medical Board of Australia. Sarah Laurie allowed her registration as a medical practitioner to lapse for personal reasons; and accordingly, does not currently practice.
    I sincerely apologise to Sarah Laurie for the harm, embarrassment and distress caused by my allegations, which I unreservedly retract.

    Professor Simon Chapman
    University of Sydney

    • E Griffiths says:

      I wonder if Professor Nocebo had the decency to write a personal letter of apology to Sarah Lawrie too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: